The Inscrutable Independent

The off-year campaign of 1950 was utterly unlike 1946, when "Had Enough?" meant the same thing to everybody. In Colorado in 1950, the issue was a classic conflict between free-spending Fair Deal liberality and traditional, economy-minded Republican conservatism, with an able advocate on each side to make the case. Rarely were issues that clear-cut elsewhere. In New York, the No. 1 issue was an indiscreet letter written by an ailing old man (TIME, Oct. 23). In Ohio, the-question was whether Robert Taft should be replaced by an amiable mediocrity mouthing speeches written for him. In Wisconsin, it was "Communists" in government. In Illinois, it seemed to be a mixture of big-city crime and who was the farmer's best friend.

Shifting Issues. Republicans had defined the issue last February as "Liberty v. Socialism," by July had shifted to "Bungling in Korea," a topic that lost its appeal when the tide turned in Korea. Though Senator Joe McCarthy had received more invitations to speak for G.O.P. candidates all over the U.S. than all other Senators combined, the issue of Reds in Government had waned (except in Joe McCarthy's home state), and some Republicans were nervously wondering whether it might yet boomerang. Rising prices and taxes bothered most people, but not even the smartest politicians could make out whom the voters blamed. The Republicans were left with the traditional war cry of opposition: "Throw the rascals out." The Democrats, pointing to high farm prices, wages & profits, warned against changing horses, and (as they have for 18 years) ran against Herbert Hoover.

In the confused fall of 1950, the outcome was more than ever in the hands of that nemesis of prophets, the independent voter. There were more of him than ever before. In Massachusetts for the first time, more voters--nearly a million of them--registered as independents than declared themselves either Democrats or Republicans.

Proud Word. Despite all of the arguments of the political classicists--that party regularity and party responsibility are as essential to a functioning democracy as the secret ballot--"independent" had become a proud word. Some scarcely deserved the title. They were the merely vacillating who voted by band wagon, the uncertain who voted by a momentary fancy or prejudice against a candidate's accent or chance phrase. But the title also included the liberal with a distaste for the Democrats' cynical politicking and Government by crony, the conservative with a distaste for reactionaries and unreconciled isolationists still lodged in Republican leadership.

The battle was for the middle, though the oratory sounded as if it were for the extremes. The Republicans most in trouble, including some Midwesterners who normally might be expected to coast in, were generally those on the outer limits of the right. On the left, Senators Claude Pepper, Frank Graham and Glen Taylor had already gone down to defeat, and in California, Helen Gahagan Douglas was having a hard time living down her past votes with the same crowd. Many Democrats had ducked, or discarded, such controversial notions as the Brannan Plan or socialized medicine in their scramble for the middle of the road. With their differences thus narrowed in so many races, it was more than ever an election that turned on the candidate himself--and on the independent voters.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.